I hope Virginia Madsen wins as a make-up award for her tremendous work in two of the great cinematic achievements of the 20th Century, Electric Dreams and Modern Girls. Somewhere, Lenny von Dohlen and Clayton Rohner are weeping.

Why Winslet but no Carrey? I thought they were equally good in "Sunshine". Winslet does an excellent job hiding her English accent in the movie. I almost forgot about it 'till I heard her interviewed on the DVD.

I was wondering what kinda backlash from the Farheniet 9/11 people, I guess Hollywood doesn't want another Michael Moore speech or it follows the rule of the documentary makes any money it won't get nominated see Hoop Dreams. They probably didn't want to nominate it, because the Republicans will take it to task, so they will save themselves the controversy. The irony to that is that Academy probably didn't nominate Passion, because of those same guidelines that they don't want or need the headaches for nominating a film. I liked 9/11 and my family thought Passion was probably the best film they have seen in awhile, my Dad however was not really moved by it and kinda thought the violence was just too over the top for him. The same man that let me watch Untouchables and Die Hard at the age of 10, I love him.

Jamie Foxx probably didn't deserve the nod in supporting, but since they are not going to give to him in Ray, he'll get it there. I think this is Marty's year, finally, should have been for Raging Bull or Goodfellas. I do think Best Picture is up for grabs though. Not nominating Uma, Quentin or Caradine for Kill Bill 2 or even Kill Bill 2 is crimenal. I don't expect them to win, but at least have the nuts to nominate of them. To me that was easily one of the top five films of the year, because of solid acting and directing. My wife will be routing for Johnny and with the Academy's reverse clock effect ie the person who should have won last year, gets it this year, he could pull it off. Million Dollar Baby is probably the early front runner even though Aviator got the nods. Clint has stroke in Hollywood, but Rocky with a vagina, I don't think so.

I'll probably do my friend's annual radio show on the oscars and just tell everyone to take a pass this year. The only category I care about is animated film and boy, is that going to be tight.

Before you get all in a tizzy over the F911 "conspiracy" for best documentary, Moore had recused it from consideration earlier in the year for the purpose of getting it on television before the election. Best Doc rules state that a documentary for consideration cannot be on TV less than 9 months after theatrical release.

(edited by Blanket Jackson on 25.1.05 1554)""Get out of my face, or you'll see what I'm like!"

Right, Michael Moore was actually going for a Best Picture nomination, although that's really a pipe dream for a documentary - or anything released before November for that matter*. (It doesn't ultimately matter anyway - like I said months ago, that award is Morgan Spurlock's to lose.)

Originally posted by Matt TrackerWonder what kind of backlash we can expect for Passion getting one nomination, in a technical category.

Conservative pundits will get to pretend they're persecuted, but they love doing that so, really, everyone wins. (In all seriousness, it was a slightly-above average movie at best and it was released in the spring, so it didn't have a prayer anyway.)

Now, had Fahrenheit 9/11 and The Passion of the Christ been up for Best Picture, well, then things might've been interesting. (It would've been the election all over again, I tells ya.) Of course, they both would've lost to Sideways anyway, so it's a moot point.

*: Does anyone doubt that if Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, which did better than I expected in nominations - I admit, was released on Christmas day, Jim Carry would be nominated for Best Actor, Michael Gondry for Best Director and the film would be up for Best Picture? Conversely, if, say, Vera Drake came out last March, it wouldn't be nominated for a goddamn thing?

Jim Carrey, Javier Bardem, Paul Giamatti, Johnny Depp, Clint Eastwood, Jamie Foxx, Leonardo DiCaprio, Don Cheadle, Tom Cruise, Liam Neeson, Adam Sandler, Jeff Bridges, Gael Garcia Bernal, Sean Penn, Denzel Washington & Bill Murray all got huge pushes for Best Actor this year, and one could argue that they all deserved a spot.-Depp lost last year (for arguably a better performance), so this is his make-up spot. Eastwood is almost universally beloved, as is Million Dollar Baby, so he gets a spot. DiCaprio had a lot of buzz two years back for Gangs of New York AND Catch Me If You Can, but vote-splitting likely cost him. One performance, arguably better than the previous two, gets him a well-deserved nomination. Cheadle's an overdue actor in a film that ended up getting a lot of nominations, so that put him over the top. Jamie Foxx is the guy everyone loves this year. He had two great performances (3 if you include TV movies) and has come off as extremely cool during the awards shows.-Murray got a nomination last year for a much better performance. Sandler had an above-average performance in a film that nobody really loved. Denzel won a couple years back, so it'll be a while before he gets another nomination unless he blows everyone away. Penn won last year. See Denzel. Bridges was in a great film that opened too early in the year for the buzz to maintain. Carrey was in a great film that opened too early...but the buzz did maintain. This is the third time he's been overlooked, so odds are the Academy's make-up strategy will kick in the next time he delivers a great performance. Neeson had a great performance in a film that not everybody loved, but Kinsey still got nominated in other categories. Tom Cruise (like Carrey) still has the stigma of a movie star, and was nominated for arguably better performances in recent years. Collateral got nominated in other categories. And Bernal's film got nominated in other categories.

For the curious, a 4-year comparison (winners in caps):

PICTURE:2003: RETURN OF THE KING, Lost in Translation, Master & Commander, Mystic River & Seabiscuit2002: CHICAGO, Gangs of New York, The Hours, The Two Towers & The Pianist2001: A BEAUTIFUL MIND, Gosford Park, In The Bedroom, The Fellowship of The Ring & Moulin Rouge2000: GLADIATOR, Chocolat, Erin Brockovich, Traffic & Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon

Originally posted by A FanThe irony to that is that Academy probably didn't nominate Passion, because of those same guidelines that they don't want or need the headaches for nominating a film.

Or, it could be that Passion was good in some aspects (like cinematography and makeup, where it was nominated) and mediocre in others (like the film itself.) It was what it was, and very few critics consider it as good as anything nominated for Best Pic, nor those omitted. The craft of Passion's construction was sound, but so was every other film listed in the Academy's nominations, and they're better overall.

Originally posted by A FanThe only category I care about is animated film and boy, is that going to be tight.

The Incredibles already has its trophy engraved. They'll give Bird a Best Original Screenplay nod, and not Shrek 2, and then come back and say that Incredibles - the film with far superior animation (just check out characters hair and clothing to see a huge difference) - is not as good? No. Incredibles: Biggest. Lock. Ever.

Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastardDoes anyone doubt that if Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, which did better than I expected in nominations - I admit, was released on Christmas day, Jim Carry would be nominated for Best Actor, Michael Gondry for Best Director and the film would be up for Best Picture?

Actually, given the Academy's history of snubbing Kaufman scripts (Being John Malkovich, Adaptation) in various categories, particularly Best Picture, I imagine it would have been left out no matter what. Admittedly, it's the better of the three films, but I don't think that would have been enough.

Giamatti's omission makes me cry, as does the fact that Portman is honored for the wrong character: Alice rather than Sam. On the latter note, I was hoping for a screenplay nod for Zack Braff, but won't scream over that one. Clive Owen, on the other hand, owns Closer and deserves his mention.

Eastwood and Alda were complete surprises. I love the latter's inclusion.

So, um, I don't want you to believe everything you hear at the parent-teacher conference, okay, 'cause...they lie. And they exaggerate. That's why they're teachers, right? Those who can't, right, Mom? Those who can't.

Kaufman & Spike Jonze will be reteaming for another film in early 2006. The Academy tends to reward films (especially in Best Picture) that are either sweeping epics, triumphs of the human spirit, or biographies (or combinations of the three). The Aviator seems to be a lock for now. For the curious, Jim Carrey's next film will be the Secret Life of Walter Mitty...which seems to fit triumph of the human spirit fairly well.

-Shrek got a screenplay nomination in 2001, and won Animated Feature in a cakewalk. This will be the same.

DVDs; Blog~New Our Lady Peace album (either called "Vampires" or "An Unusual Amount of Common Sense") this March~

So if box office were the biggest indicator of what is the "best picture" these would be your nominated films. The films actually do have a combined oscar count of 11 nominations. Only "Fockers" has zero noms.

And as for the comment that this is a "conservative" year for nominations I have to disagree, not when "Sideways" and "Eternal Sunshine..." are up for multiple top nominations. Neither film screams your typical oscar contender.

"Flaming Box of Stuff:

If a brewery closes in the middle of the Pacific Northwest and no one cares, what happens to the soon-to-be-unemployed? The refreshingly low-keyed Seattle troupe answers that question in "It's the Water." Set in the 1970s  the show opens with black lights, "Dark Side of the Moon" and a character named Burnout  but not so '70s that anyone makes a "Laverne and Shirley" joke.

In the opening sequence, the plant manager, a one-man Revenge of the Nerd, ducks his workers' questions about rumors of a layoff. From there, the show moves from direct silliness (a bear-hunting expedition during the final company picnic) to an unexpectedly moving encounter between a brewery grunt and a waitress in a local tavern. There's a pleasing lack of strain in "It's the Water."

Originally posted by krakken2000While on the topic of box office and the oscars. These are the top 6 grossing films of the year (I included "Meet the Fockers" at 6 since it is still in wide distribution):

So if box office were the biggest indicator of what is the "best picture" these would be your nominated films. The films actually do have a combined oscar count of 11 nominations. Only "Fockers" has zero noms.

And as for the comment that this is a "conservative" year for nominations I have to disagree, not when "Sideways" and "Eternal Sunshine..." are up for multiple top nominations. Neither film screams your typical oscar contender.

But the fact is that the Top 5 of those films DID get nominated for awards. Spider-Man 2 got 3 nominations, just like the original film! Success at the box office HAS shown to be an indicator of the films that get the non-major awards nominations in the past.

DVDs; Blog~New Our Lady Peace album (either called "Vampires" or "An Unusual Amount of Common Sense") this March~

This is a very vanilla line-up, but it's also been a very vanilla year. I thought 'Eternal Sunshine...' was the best movie of the year and I didn't like any of Kaufman's other movies all that much. However, since it's not nominated I'd like to see 'Ray' do well. Jamie Foxx did a great job in that movie and made me believe that I was actually watching Ray Charles. Hell, have him sweep both awards at least that would lead to some interesting opinions.

As far as 'Passion...' I would have been okay with Gibson getting a directing nomination. He did do a good job of getting his vision across.

Just two years ago, Jamie Foxx was some jackass hitting on my lunch date in Los Angeles while taking a break from filming "Breakin' All the Rules", and today he's nominated for two acting Oscars. Unbelievable.

Originally posted by Freeway420But the fact is that the Top 5 of those films DID get nominated for awards. Spider-Man 2 got 3 nominations, just like the original film! Success at the box office HAS shown to be an indicator of the films that get the non-major awards nominations in the past.

I think that has more to do though with the nature of the blockbuster. Most blockbuster type films are loud and blow up real good and that's why they do well in technical categories.

"Flaming Box of Stuff:

If a brewery closes in the middle of the Pacific Northwest and no one cares, what happens to the soon-to-be-unemployed? The refreshingly low-keyed Seattle troupe answers that question in "It's the Water." Set in the 1970s  the show opens with black lights, "Dark Side of the Moon" and a character named Burnout  but not so '70s that anyone makes a "Laverne and Shirley" joke.

In the opening sequence, the plant manager, a one-man Revenge of the Nerd, ducks his workers' questions about rumors of a layoff. From there, the show moves from direct silliness (a bear-hunting expedition during the final company picnic) to an unexpectedly moving encounter between a brewery grunt and a waitress in a local tavern. There's a pleasing lack of strain in "It's the Water."